But that the dialogue deservedly embraces a design of this kind, and that Plato alone preserving the Pythagoric mode in the theory concerning nature, has pro- secuted with great subtilty the proposed doctrine,—ought to be considered by those who are more sagacious and acute. Por since, in short, physiology receives a threefold division, and one part of it is conversant with matter and material causes, but another part also adds the investigation of form, and evinces that this is the more principal cause; and again, since a third part demonstrates that these have not the relation of causes, but of concauses, and admits that there are other causes, Which are properly so called, of things generated by nature, viz. the eflec- tive, paradigmatic and final cause ;—this being the case, among the multitude of physiologists prior to Plato, that directed their attention to matter, there was ἃ diversity of Opinion respecting the subject of things, For Anaxagoras, who appears to have seen, while the rest were asleep, that intellect is the first cause of generated natures, made no use of intellect in his explaination of things, but rather employed certain airs and iethers as the causes of things that are generated, as Soerates says in the Phiedo. But of those posterior to) Plato, who were the patrons of a sect, not all, but such of them as were more accurate than the rest, thought fit to survey physical form in conjunction with matter, referring the prin- ciples of bodies to matter and form. Porif they any where mention the pro- ducing cause, as when they say that nature is a principle of motion, they rather take away its efficacious and properly effective power (than allow the existence of it] by not granting that it contains the reasons [or productive principles} of the things effected by it, but admitting that many things are generated casually. To which we may add, that they do not acnnowledge that there is a pre-existing producing cause of, in short, all physical things, but of those only that are borne along in generation. Por of eternal natures they clearly say, that there is no effective cause; im asserting whieh they are ignorant that they must either give subsistence to the whole of heaven from chance, or evince Chat whats casual is Itself productive of itsell.
Plato however alone, following the Pythagoreans, delivers indeed, as the cons causes of natural things, a tiiversal reeipient, and material form, which are sub- servient to causes properly so called, ino the generation of things. Bat prior to these, he investigates principal causes, viz. the producing cause, the paradigm, and the final cause. ‘Through these also, he places a demiurgic intellect over
Viz. Anstotle, and his followers,
ποοκ 1. Timzeus of Plato. 3
the universe, and an intelligible cause in which the universe primarily subsists, and the good, which is established prior to the producing cause, in the order of the desirable. Tor since that which is moved by another thing, is suspended from the power of that which moves, as it is evidently not adapted either to pro- duce, or perfect, or save itself, in all these it is in want of a producing cause, and ix conducted by it. Tt is 1+ therefore, that the concauses of natural things, should be suspended from true causes, from which they are produced, with a view to which they were fabricated by the father of all things, and for the sake of which they were generated. Justly, therefore, are all these delivered, and investigated with accuracy by Plato; and the remaining two, form and the subject-matter, suspended from these. For this world is not the same with the intellizible or intellectual worlds, which, according to some, subsist in pure forms ; but one thing in it has the relation of reason and form, and another, of a subject. But that Plato very properly delivers all these causes of the fabrication of the world, viz. the good, the intelligible paradigm, the maker, form, and the subject nature, is evident from the following considerations. Vor if he had spoken con- cerning the intelligible Gods, he would have evinced that the good alone is the cause of these ; for the intelligible number is from this cause. But if concerning the intellectual Gods, he would have shown that he good and the intellizible are the causes‘ of these. For the intellectual multitude proceeds from the intelligible unities, and the one fountain of beings. And if he had spoken concerning the supermundane Gods, he would have produced them from the intellectual and total fabrication, from the intelligible Gods, and from the cause of all things, For this cause gives subsistence to all things of which secondary natures are generative, but ina primary, ineflable, and inconceivable manner. But since he discusses mundaie affairs and the whole world, he gives to it matter and form, descending into it from the supermundane Gods, suspends it from the total * fabrication, assimilates it to intelligible animal, and demonstrates it to be a God by the participation of the good; and thus he renders the whole world an inte!- lectual, animated God, This, therefore, and such as this, is, as we have said, the scope of the Timienus,
This however being the case, the order of the universe is appropriately indi- cated in the beginning of the dialogue, through images; but in the middle of it,
* Tustead of ἀντι τουτων in this place, it is necessary to read αἰτίας rourwy.
> For wAns bere, it is necessary to read ολην.-
4 PROCLUS ON THE [nook &
the whole fabrication of the world. is delivered ; and in the end, partial natures, and the extremities of fabrication, are woven together with wholes. For the resumption of the discourse about a polity, and the narration respecting the Atlantic island, unfold through images the theory of the world, For if we direct our attention to the union and multitude of mundane natures, we must say that the polity which Socrates summarily discusses, is an image of their union, esta- Hlishing as its end the communion which pervades through all things; but that the war ofthe Atlantics with the Athenians, whieh Critias narrates, is an image of the division of mundane natures, and especially of the opposition according to the two co-ordinations of thirgs. Bat if we divide the universe into the celestial and sublunary regions, we Ν᾽ say that the [Socratic] polity, ts assimilated to the celestial order ; for Socrates savs, that the paradigms of it is established in the heavens; but the warof the Athintics, to eeneration, which subsists through con- trariety and mutation. “Phese things therefore, for the reasons we lave mentioned, precede the whole of physiology.
Butatter this, the demiursie, paradigmatic and final causes of the universe are unfolded, in consequence of the pre existence of whieh, the universe is fabricated both according to the whole and the parts of it. Por the corporeal nature of it iN fashioned with forms, and divided by divine numbers; soul also ts produced from the Demiurgus, and is filled with harmonic reasons, and divine and demiurgic syinbols ; and the whole animal is woven together conformably to the united comprehension of it inthe intelfeible world. “Phe parts likewise of at, are ar- ranged ina becoming manner in the whole, both such as are corporeal and such as are vital For partial souls being introduced into. the world, are arranged about their leading Gods, and through their vehicles become mundane, toitating their presiding deities, Mortal animals likewise, are fabricated and vivitied by the eclestial Gods: where also mau is surveyed, and the mode of his subsistence, and throuh what causes he was constituted, Man indecd ts considered prior to other things, cither because the theory respecting him pertains to us who make him the subject of discussion, and are ourselves men; or because man is ἃ micro- cosin, and all sueh things subsist in him partially, its the world contains divinely and totally. For there isan intellect ino us which is in energy, and a rational
non! procoeding from the same® father, and Che sane Vivifie Goddess, as the soul
' Vor arribeaes here, itis obviously requisite to re ad αὐ τιῆε σέων,
Vor αὐτὴν rarpos here, 1 ᾿ν neeessary to read aurov marpos,
nook 1.) TIMAEUS OF PLATO. 5
of the universe ; also an etherial vehicle analogous to the heavens, and a terres- trial boay derived from the four elements, and with which likewise it- is co-ordt- nate. Tf therefore, it is necessary that the universe should) be surveved multifa- viously, in the intelligible, and in the sensible world, paradigmatically, iconically, totally and partially, it will be well, if the nature of man is perfectly discussed in the theory of the universe,
You may also say that conformably to the Pythazoric custom, it is necessary to connect the discussion of that which surveys with that which is surveyed. For since we are informed what the world is, it is requisite T think to add also, whiat that is which considers these things, and makes them the subject of rational anim- adversion. But that Plato directs his attention likewise to this, is evident froin what he says near the end of the dialogue, that it is necessary that the intellect of him who intends to obtain a happy life, should be assimilated to the object of his intelleetion. For the universe is always happy; and our soul will likewise be happy, When itis assimilated to the universes for thus it will be led) back to its cause, Foras the sensible man is to the universe, so is) the intelligible man_ to animal itself, But there secondary natures always adhere to such as are first, and parts subsist in unproceeding union with their wholes, and are established in them. Hence, when the sensible man is assimilated to the universe, he also imitates: his paradigm after an appropriate manner, becoming a world through similitude to the world, and happy through resemblance to that blessed) god [the universe. } The ends also of fabrication are subtilely elaborated by Plato, according to genus and species, and also what pertains to meteors, together with productions in the earth, and in animals. such things as are preternataral, and such as are accord- ing tonature; in which part of the Timawus, likewise, the principles of medicine are unfelded. For the physiologist ends αἱ these; since he is a surveyor of nature. Fora subsistence aceordiig to nature, exists together with nature; but the preternatural is a departure trom nature, It is the business, therefore, of the physiologist to understand in how many modes this aberration subsists, and how it becomes terminated in moderation and a natural condition. But itis the pro- vince of the medical art to unfold) such particulars as are consequent to these. Aud in these things especially, Plato has something in common with other physiologists, For they were conversant with the most material, and the ultimate works of nature, neglecting the whole heaven, aud the orders of the mundane Gods, in consequence of directing their attention to matter; but they bade farewell to forms and primary causes.
6 PROCLUS ON THE (Book 1,